Am definitely not going to waste my euros on going to see that film. The idea that Wm. Shakepeare didn't write his own plays and/or sonnets isn't new, but it is crackpot, and it doesn't deserve a wider audience.

The author of Shakespeare's plays could only have been someone who was an actor/director (the plays work from a stagecraft point of view) and the son of a glover (70 references in the plays to things only someone brought up in a glover's household would know). Shakespeare was an actor/director and the son of a glover. The Earl of Oxford... wasn't.

I hadn't planned to actively boycott, but wasn't planning to see the movie anyway. What an insulting idea. It's up there with "The pyramids in central america were built by space aliens because obviously indians couldn't have done it".

If it's any consolation, reviewers over here (David Edelstein of New York Magazine included) think it's really bad. And from a movie craft standpoint, not just "It couldn't have been DeVere" standpoint.